I keep seeing the same pattern when an OEM starts losing ground
New machines land constantly, refreshed ranges, improved technology, Telematics adoption increasing, competitive finance solutions.
And still, market share erodes.
That's rarely a product problem. Usually, it's a direction problem and the channel is where it shows up first.
→ Product roadmap gets mistaken for strategy. It isn't one. A strategy says what the business is trying to become, a roadmap just says what's shipping.
→ Without a clear commercial direction, product and go-to-market start pulling independently, engineering optimises for what's buildable, sales optimises for what's sellable this quarter, and nobody's optimising for where the business needs to be in three years.
→ Aftermarket gets treated as an afterthought, when it's actually what defends share while direction gets clarity and implemented.
In construction equipment, uptime and parts availability win more repeat business than headline specifications do. If parts and service profitability is soft, dealers under invest in technicians. Uptime slips. Share erodes quietly, not through one lost deal, but through attrition nobody notices until the numbers roll up.
Then there's the network itself, usually the clearest evidence that direction is missing.
→ One instruction for every dealer guarantees frustration. Some need capital. Some need succession planning. Some need sales discipline. Some need repacing. Treating them all the same isn't strategy, it's an absence of one.
→ Dealers see products on a roadmap. They don't see what's being asked of them commercially over the next 24–36 months, because HQ hasn't decided either.
None of this needs reinventing the product.
It needs an OEM willing to decide what it's actually trying to be and then build the channel to match.
When you've seen an OEM start losing ground, was it the product, or the absence of a plan behind it?
#DealerDevelopment #ConstructionEquipment #MarketShare#TerritoryCoverage~StrategicPlanning#Profitability